While Europe mulls multiple praiseworthy schemes to limit the damage inflicted by cancer, one of the most promising avenues is being neglected – and many Europeans are dying unnecessarily as a consequence. Lung cancer, the biggest cancer killer, is still on the loose, largely unchecked, and the most effective method for combating it – screening – is unaccountably being ignored, writes European Alliancce for Personalised Medicine (EAPM) Executive Director Dr. Denis Horgan.
Screening is particularly important for lung cancer because most cases are discovered too late for any effective intervention: 70% are diagnosed at an advanced incurable stage, resulting in the deaths of a third of patients within three months. In England, 35% of lung cancers are diagnosed following emergency presentation, and 90% of these 90% are stage III or IV. But detecting disease long before symptoms appear permits treatment that forestalls metastasis, drastically improving outcomes, with cure rates above 80%.
Over the last two decades the evidence has become overwhelming that screening can transform the fate of lung cancer victims. Disturbingly, however, EU member states still hesitate over its adoption, and it remains low on policy priorities nationally and at EU level.
A valuable opportunity to remedy this deficiency is in the offing. Before the end of 2020, the European Commission has unveiled Europe's Beating Cancer Plan, a major opportunity to guide national actions. It will be, in the words of Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, "an ambitious cancer plan to reduce the suffering caused by this disease.” Preparatory drafts suggest it will offer a powerful, coherent and almost comprehensive response to the havoc that cancer wreaks on lives, livelihoods and quality of life across Europe.
Almost comprehensive. Because on the potential for lung cancer screening to save lives, it has little to say. The document is commendably strong on prevention, where there is, as it points out, important scope for improvement, with up to 40% of cancer cases being attributed to preventable causes. It also highlights screening as a vital tool in colorectal, cervical and breast cancer. But screening for lung cancer – which alone kills more than those three cancers combined - receives only a few passing references in the draft text, and no endorsement commensurate with the impact of its implementation at scale. This threatens to leave LC screening in its current under-exploited status in the European Union, where although the disease is the third leading cause of death, there is still no EU recommendation for systematic screening, and no large-scale national plan.
The case for action
The most recent studies add to an accumulation of evidence of the merits of LC screening over the last two decades. A just-published IQWiG study concludes that there is a benefit of low-dose CT screening, and "the assumption that screening also has a positive effect on overall mortality seems justified." Some studies show it saves an estimated 5 in 1000 people from dying of lung cancer within 10 years, while others warn that 5-year survival among all patients with lung cancer is barely 20%. Every year, at least twice as many people die from lung cancer as from other common malignancies, including colorectal, stomach, liver and breast cancer. In Europe it causes more than 266,000 deaths yearly - 21% of all cancer-related deaths.
Late presentation precludes for many patients the option of surgery, which – despite continuing improvements in other forms of therapy – is currently the only demonstrated method to improve long term survival. The concentration of patients among smokers adds a further urgency to the introduction of systematic screening. Efforts to discourage and reduce tobacco use will have effects only over the longer term. Meanwhile, the best hope for the millions of smokers and former smokers – predominantly among the most disadvantaged populations of Europe – is in screening. But this is precisely the population that is hardest to reach – reflected in the fact that fewer than 5% of individuals worldwide at high risk for lung cancer have undergone screening.
The prospects for change
Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan (BCP) holds out the prospect of many improvements in tackling cancer, and its vision embraces admirable principles – including the merits of screening, technology and enlightened guidance. It foresees "putting the most modern technologies at the service of cancer care to ensure early cancer detection." But as long as it hesitates over endorsing screening for lung cancer, a major opportunity will remain neglected.
The BCP acknowledge that live are saved by early detection of cancer through screening. They speak approvingly of population-based screening programmes for breast, cervical and colorectal cancer in national cancer control plans, and of ensuring that 90% of the qualifying citizens will have access by 2025. For screening of these three cancers, they even envisage reviewing the Council Recommendation, and issuing new or updated Guidelines and Quality Assurance schemes. But lung cancer screening enjoys no such priority in the BCP, which are limited to allusions, to a "possible extension" of screening to new cancers, and to a consideration of "whether the evidence justifies an extension of targeted cancer screening."
As Europe enters the third decade of the century, significant evidence has already justified action to implement LC screening. It is not the time to be debating whether the evidence is sufficient. The evidence is in. "There is evidence of a benefit of low-dose CT screening compared to no screening," says one of the recent studies. The NLST study demonstrated a relative reduction in lung cancer mortality of 20% and a 6.7% reduction in all-cause mortality in the LDCT arm. 5-year survival in patients diagnosed early (stage I-II) can be as high as 75%, especially in patients who have a surgical resection. Earlier diagnosis moves the focus from palliative treatment of incurable disease to radical potentially curative treatment with a resultant transformation of long-term survival. LuCE claims that five-year survival rates for NSCLC could be 50% higher with earlier diagnosis.
Historic objections to LC screening – in terms of risks of radiation, overdiagnosis, and unnecessary interventions, or uncertainties over risk models and cost effectiveness – have been largely answered by recent research. And given the commitment of the BCP to put research, innovation and new technologies at the service of cancer care ("the use of technology in healthcare can be a lifesaver", says the latest draft), it might well provide for further studies to refine and clarify the areas where LC screening can be even further improved, and the necessary infrastructure and training be consolidated.
Maximizing the opportunities for diagnosis too
There are other aspects of BCP linked directly or indirectly to screening which could – and should – enhance early detection and accurate diagnosis of lung cancer. Draft texts already make mention of exploring "early diagnosis measures to new cancers, such as prostate, lung, and gastric cancer." By providing more precise information on tumours, lung cancer screening has opened the way to more personalized treatment for lung cancer and provides fertile ground for further innovations in technology, image analytics and statistical techniques, and future image interpretation will be increasingly assisted by computer-aided diagnostics. The EU's parallel Mission on Cancer is expected to generate new evidence on the optimisation of existing population-based cancer screening programmes, develop novel approaches for screening and early detection, and provide options to extend cancer screening to new cancers. It will also contribute to providing new biomarkers and less invasive technologies for diagnostics. The new ‘European Cancer Imaging Initiative’ will facilitate the development of new, enhanced diagnostic methods to improve quality and speed of screening programmes using Artificial Intelligence, and promote innovative solutions for cancer diagnostics. A new Knowledge Centre on Cancer will function as an ‘evidence-clearing house’ for early detection through screening. An upgraded European Cancer Information System will facilitate the assessment of cancer screening programmes through improved data collection on cancer screening indicators. The analysis of interoperable electronic health records will improve understanding of disease mechanisms leading to the development of new screenings, diagnostic pathways and treatments.
These are encouraging concepts, and could – if implemented – assist the refinement of early detection and diagnosis. But it would be even more promising if the recognition of improved access to biomarker testing on diagnosis and progression extended to treatment, and to advancing the emergence of personalised medicine. The BCP could be the context for a more systematic development of biomarker testing. Perhaps data on variations in testing rates could be included in the envisaged cancer inequalities registry.
Similarly, taking advantage of other technology advances in treatment could give patients still greater chances of survival and of quality of life. In addition to the critical role played by radiology in screening, radiotherapy itself has advanced substantially during the past two decades, with new technologies and techniques allowing ever more accurate, effective, and less toxic treatments, thus allowing shorter and more patient-friendly regimens. It is now established as an essential pillar in multidisciplinary oncology. And as with all the other opportunities in better screening, diagnosis and treatment, appropriate coverage in healthcare budgets and reimbursement systems is essential if good intentions are to be converted into action.
What is essential is that LC screening programs be implemented in a comprehensive and coherent and consistent manner, rather than arising as a by-product of sporadic ordering of scans by providers without a programme infrastructure in place. Given the potential for such a large number of lives to be positively impacted by a timely diagnosis of early-stage treatable disease, the initiation of these programmes should be given the highest priority by healthcare institutions and providers. The new EU Cancer Screening Scheme envisaged in the BCP should have its vision extended beyond breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening to lung cancer. The Commission proposal to review the Council recommendation on cancer screening is a positive step forward.
The challenge now is to act, and to implement LC screening – and in so doing, to save lives and prevent avoidable suffering and loss across Europe. If the EU does not take advantage of initiatives such as BCP, long-overdue improvements in lung cancer care will be deferred again, with the worst impact felt in Europe's most disadvantaged populations. Policy makers should recognise this unexploited potential, and should respond by driving implementation.
EAPM: Virtual cancer institute on the cards, EMA reform and infectious disease agency
Good afternoon and welcome, health colleagues, to the European Alliance for Personalised Medicine (EAPM) update – it is the last shout for the upcoming EAPM Slovenian EU Presidency conference (1 July), so don’t forget to register and download your agenda, writes EAPM Executive Director Dr. Denis Horgan.
EAPM Presidency conference a few days away...
The EAPM conference will act as a bridging event between the EU Presidencies of Portugal and Slovenia on Thursday 1 July.
We’ll be discussing, at some point during the day, most or all of what we’ll be talking about below. The conference is divided into sessions which cover the follows areas: Session 1: Generating alignment in the regulation of Personalized Medicine: RWE and Citizen Trust; Session 2: Beating Prostate Cancer and Lung Cancer - The Role of the EU Beating Cancer: Updating EU Council Conclusions on Screening; Session 3: Health Literacy - Understanding Ownership and Privacy of Genetic Data and Session 4: Securing patient Access to Advanced Molecular Diagnostics.
Virtual cancer institute proposed by Committee draft report
As highlighted last Friday, the draft report from the European Parliament’s special cancer committee was made available last week. Presently, this will be open to amendment from European politicians.
One additional aspect which was included in the report was the proposal of creation of a “virtual European Cancer Institute” was made public today (29 June). EAPM supports this.
As discussed last week, the report, authored by France’s MEP Véronique Trillet-Lenoir (Renew Europe), reiterates many of the points and concerns raised in the Commission’s Beating Cancer Plan.
In the report, which aims at strengthening the EU’s response to the disease, Trillet-Lenoir suggests the creation of a virtual cancer institute. The aim of the organization would be to create a road map to co-ordinate “large-scale prevention campaigns and effective communication campaigns on health promotion in educational programmes.”
The planned institute would also be responsible for connecting and helping to implement many of the elements introduced by the Commission Cancer Plan. For example, it could host the planned Knowledge Centre on Cancer. It could also help create best practices between European Reference Networks and Comprehensive cancer centers. The institute could also help with “identifying research priorities and possibly enable the development of a coordinated and efficient cancer research force in Europe.”
Of course and as ever, the issue of budgeting is also tackled in the report with a call to member countries to put aside enough money to implement the Commission’s plan, as well as their own national-level cancer plans. “No more than 30 [percent] of Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan should be allocated to the implementation of the [National Cancer Control Programs]”. A limited budget of €4 billion is set aside at the pan-EU level.
Parliament's health committee OKs mandate change for infectious disease agency
The European Parliament’s health committee voted today (29 June) in favour of bolstering the mandate of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC). Sixty-seven MEPs voted in favour, eight against and one abstained, according to the health committee press service.
Rights and wrongs during pandemic
Commission Vice President Margaritis Schinas spoke to MEPs in the health committee on Monday (28 June), detailing the Commission’s COVID-19 lessons learned document, concerning the rights and wrongs during the pandemic’s past 16 months. The overall lesson? The EU has “not taken health preparedness seriously enough before the pandemic”, Schinas said.
Schinas didn’t hold back when he said the EU’s early response was “fragmented, ad hoc, temporary,” and measures “were patchy and unco-ordinated” at the EU level. He reminded MEPs of the export bans and personal protective equipment fights colouring the early days of the pandemic, which were an embarrassment for the EU.
Schinas used the lessons learned to push for more health coordination at the EU level, arguing that only someone with “ill faith … would challenge” that things were better when countries worked together. Schinas drew a parallel to the 2008 financial crisis, which prompted the EU to establish the “banking union”, saying: “There again the EU action was decisive.” 10 different proposals in the lessons learned would help establish a similar health union.
The EPP’s Peter Liese blamed both the Greens and the Left for being wary of advance purchasing agreements for vaccines. He also pushed for more investment on manufacturing capacity, pointing to how the EU allowed exports “without any control” for too long. Michele Rivasi from the Greens, meanwhile, wanted more in the Commission’s communication on the vaccine delivery delays and the “fiasco” on joint purchasing of vaccines, as well as the transparency — or lack thereof — over their contracts and costs.
WHO says Biased AI health tech could disadvantage poorer countries
While artificial intelligence has the potential to make healthcare more accessible and efficient, it also is vulnerable to the social, economic and systemic biases that have been entrenched in society for generations.
The truth is, humans choose the data that goes into an algorithm, which means these choices are still subject to unintentional biases that can negatively impact underrepresented groups. These biases can occur at any phase of AI development and deployment, whether it's using biased datasets to build an algorithm, or applying an algorithm in a different context than the one it was originally intended for. The most common source of bias is data that doesn't sufficiently represent the target population.
This can have adverse implications for certain groups. For example, women and people of color are typically underrepresented in clinical trials. As others have pointed out, if algorithms analyzing skin images were trained on images of white patients, but are now applied more broadly, they could potentially miss malignant melanomas in people of colour.
Italian PM Draghi backs EMA reform
“We need a reinforcement and reform of the EMA,” Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi has said. As for vaccines: “The controversy is that Sputnik failed to get EMA approval and probably never will. The Chinese vaccine is not enough to fight the epidemic.”
“The epidemic is not over, we are not out yet. A few weeks ago the UK had more or less equal cases compared to France today. Today they are twenty times more likely, so the epidemic needs more determination, attention and awareness.
“We need to keep the pressure on the swaps high and we continue to do them. It is very important to immediately identify the development of new variants and infections. We are deploying a lot more,” Draghi added.
Draghi later responded to a question about how the announced EMA reform would work. “It’s very quick to say, but I’m raised this issue myself. There’s been a certain co-ordination. I hope that other agencies use it in other countries and think about the United States.
That is all from EAPM for now – enjoy the rest of your week, stay safe and well, and don’t forget, it’s your last chance to register for the EAPM Slovenian EU Presidency conference on 1 July here, and download your agenda here!
EU health chief: Access to gynaecological cancer treatment differs widely across EU
There is a large inequality in access to women’s cancer services and treatments across the EU, according to the bloc’s health chief, who highlighted the role of Europe’s Beating Cancer plan in bridging these disparities.
Health Commissioner Stella Kyriakides said there is a need to “break the silence” and talk openly about gynaecological cancers.
The EU, she added, has “to assure that all women in all corners of the EU, get the support, have access to the screening and the vaccination, the information and the multidisciplinary care that they should be having”.
Her hopes are on Europe’s beating cancer plan, which must bring “real change”.
“This is what European citizens expect from us. And I also believe that we don’t have a right to fail them. We have an opportunity and we need to seize it,” Kyriakides said.
Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan was set in 2020 to tackle the entire disease pathway, from prevention to treatment, with the goal to equalise access to high-quality care, diagnosis and treatment across the block.
Inequalities across the bloc
However, access to cancer detection and treatment currently differs widely across the bloc.
Antonella Cardone, director of the European cancer patient coalition (ECPC), said screening programs lead to a remarkable reduction in incidence and mortality but “there are major disparities in screening between the different EU member states”.
This means many women are not being diagnosed early enough when the disease is still treatable and “often curable”.
The highest incidence among all women cancers is breast cancer, which accounts for 88% of cancer cases among women.
But the access to screening that helps early detection of cancer for people at risk ranges from 6% to 90% among member states. Screening for cervical cancer for people at risk ranges from 25% to 80% in the EU.
“These statistics represent […] early detection, which leads to early treatment, and life saved. Or late detection, which often leads to life lost,” said Kyriakides. About 40% of cancer cases are preventable through effective cancer prevention strategies.
The Commissioner added that the EU cancer plan “aims to offer breast cancer screening to 90% of people who qualify for it by 2025.”
In addition to this, new European guidelines for breast cancer screening diagnosis are being finalised and will be launched at the end of June.
After several years, guidelines on colorectal and cervical cancer should be also released.
They should “result in better screening and diagnosis, better information and awareness for women and better training for health workers”, Kyriakides said.
Treatment, as well as detection, is also unequal between member states.
For example, survival rates following treatment for breast cancer vary by 20% among EU countries.
“I am determined that all patients have the same opportunities for care, no matter where they live in the European Union. The cancer plan aims to support this goal,” Kyriakides said, adding that “psychological, social, nutritional, sexual counselling and rehabilitation programs” will be offered to patients.
More to be done to tackle women cancer
Detection and treatment are not the only parts of the plan that specifically focus on women.
Human papillomavirus is another target. It causes cervical cancer, which is the second most common cancer among women aged 15 to 39.
The goal, Kyriakides said, “is to eliminate cervical cancer caused by the human papillomaviruses by vaccinating at least 90% of the EU target population of girls by 2030″.
Romana Jerković, the Croatian socialist MEP and a member of the intergroup on cancer, said that although cervical cancer is preventable with immunisation “vaccination rates against the human papillomavirus are worryingly low in some European countries. It is about time that the member states wrap up their efforts and ensure that their target population is vaccinated”.
Kyriakides added that the plan also addresses “challenges faced by cancer survivors”.
“We aim to launch the ‘better life for cancer patients’ initiatives, including the creation of a virtual European cancer patient digital centre. This will support the exchange of patient data, and monitoring of survivors’ health conditions,” she said.
Jerković also highlighted the importance of digitalisation and better data management.
“Better and faster exchange of the data and the information can be life-saving factors in someone’s treatment,” she said, adding that European health data space will play a huge role in cancer patients’ health data access.
sra Urkmez, the previous co-chair of The European Network of Gynaecological Cancer Advocacy Groups (ENGAGe), warned that although Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan addresses the issues well, “it’s easier said than done”. She highlighted the importance of staying united “when it comes to such goals”.
Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan will have €4 billion of funding, including €1.25bn from the future EU4Health programme.
EAPM: Stronger together against cancer and with good data sharing
Good morning, one and all, and welcome to the European Alliance for Personalised Medicine (EAPM) update – there is much positivity concerning the battle against cancer and the consultation on the health data sharing plan, so some refreshing good news after all the recent COVID-related despondency, writes EAPM Executive Director Dr. Denis Horgan.
Porto Declaration on Cancer Research
The Porto Declaration on Cancer Research was launched during the European Cancer Research Summit 2021, held on 3 May at the Portuguese Institute of Oncology (IPO) in Porto under the Portuguese Presidency of the Council of the European Union.
The declaration presented by Portuguese Minister Manuel Heitor is the result of the work done by several researchers, scientific and clinical leaders and political decision-makers, who have reinforced the need to broaden Europe's Beating Cancer Plan over recent months, particularly through extending and reinforcing the European network of Comprehensive Cancer Centres (CCCs), based on the reinforcement of three types of research infrastructure:
Translational research infrastructure
Clinical and prevention trial infrastructure
Outcomes research infrastructure
These infrastructure components are increasingly being deemed critical to prevention, early detection, diagnosis, treatment, monitoring disease treatment and patient support and assistance. National participation in the European network of Comprehensive Cancer Centres is led in Portugal by the “Porto Comprehensive Cancer Centre”, based in the Porto IPO, in partnership with its associated laboratory, i3S, which recently received funding of around EUR 15 million for new equipment under the North Regional Operational Programme.
The Porto Declaration on Cancer Research strengthens the commitment of the Trio Presidency of the Council of the European Union (Germany, Portugal and Slovenia) to significantly reduce cancer mortality by 2030, with a goal of 75% of cancer patients in Europe surviving for at least 10 years. Ensuring this goal across Europe means reinforcing the development of a continuum of research activities, from basic to clinical research, including the reinforcement of the European network of Comprehensive Cancer Centres and the three research infrastructure components mentioned above, as well as active participation by the patients and their associations in order to mitigate social and economic inequalities.
The Porto Declaration on Cancer Research thus calls on all European citizens and their Member States to stimulate the synergies in the areas of regional, national and European funding so that cancer research infrastructure access will be easier and fairer.
Speaking at the Cancer Research Summit on 3 May, Health Commissioner Stella Kyriakides said that it’s key the Commission’s Cancer Plan “works hand in hand” with the Horizon Europe Mission on Cancer in order to “ensure coherence between research goals and policy objectives.” screening program was suspended five years ago due to low turnout and needs to be upgraded, she explained.
Consultation on health data sharing plan opened by Commission
On 3 May, the Commission published an open public consultation on the European Health Data Space (EHDS) - an important building block of the European Health Union. The EHDS aims to make full use of digital health to provide high-quality healthcare and reduce inequalities. It will promote access to health data for prevention, diagnosis and treatment, research and innovation, as well as for policy-making and legislation. The EHDS will place individuals' rights to control their own personal health data at its core. The consultation will remain open for responses until 26 July 2021. Health and Food Safety Commissioner Stella Kyriakides said: ″The European Health Data Space will be a crucial component of a strong European Health Union. It will enable EU-wide collaboration for better healthcare, better research and better health policy making. I invite all interested citizens and stakeholders to take part in the consultation and help us leverage the power of data for our health. This will have to rest on a strong foundation of non-negotiable citizens' rights, including privacy and data protection.″
Innovative solutions and digital technologies including artificial intelligence (AI), can transform healthcare systems. They make them more sustainable and improve people's health. The development of these technologies requires secure access by researchers and innovators to substantial amounts of health data.
This public consultation focuses on:
the access to and use of health data for healthcare provision, research and innovation, policy-making and regulatory decision;
fostering a genuine single market for digital health services and products, including innovative ones.
The creation of a European Health Data Space is one the key priorities of this Commission in the area of health. The purpose of the EHDS is to promote health-data exchange and support research on new preventive strategies, as well as on treatments, medicines, medical devices and outcomes. In the Communication on the European Strategy for Data, the Commission announced its objective to deliver concrete results in the area of health data and to understand the potential generated by developments in digital technologies. The collection, access, storage, use and re-use of data in healthcare present specific challenges that need to be addressed.
This requires a regulatory framework that best serves individuals' interests and rights, especially as regards the processing of sensitive personal health data. In this context, the Commission adopted its Data Governance Act proposal (2020) with conditions regarding access to data, and provisions to foster trust in voluntary data sharing. Facilitating better access to, and exchange of, health data is essential to ensure increased accessibility, availability and affordability of healthcare. It will stimulate innovation in health and care for better treatment and outcomes, and encourage innovative solutions that make use of digital technologies, including AI.
Health commissioner offers sweeping ambitions for pharma reform and health committee publishes draft response to pharma strategy
No patient in Europe should have to go without medicines that he or she needs due to money or other obstacles, Health Commissioner Stella Kyriakides has said.
Speaking at an event organized by the European Commission and the Portuguese EU presidency, Kyriakides pledged that EU’s pharmaceutical strategy will tackle the core issues that make medicines unavailable to those who need them.
The strategy will culminate with a legislative proposal, planned for 2022, revising the EU’s basic pharma rules, which will open the door to the overhaul.
Kyriakides’ willingness to tear up the current rules may make drugmakers nervous, since they rely on perks like market exclusivity to protect their bottom line. The 2022 reform will take into account “the relationship with intellectual property rights to address aspects that impede the competitive functioning of markets,” she noted. “The failures of markets should not be the failures of our health systems.”
The European Parliament’s Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety has published a draft response to the Commission’s Pharmaceutical Strategy. The draft report is authored by Spanish MEP Dolors Montserrat from the European People’s Party who is rapporteur for the pharmaceutical strategy. The document calls on the Commission to push ahead with a number of priorities that it identified in the pharmaceutical strategy, which it published in November. Among the demands made in the draft is a call on the Commission “to incorporate new criteria into the system of incentives for research into and the development of new medicines for unmet therapeutic needs.” It also asks the Commission to review incentives and improve price transparency.
EU pharma vulnerabilities
The executive arm of the European Union on Wednesday (5 May) moved to reduce the bloc's dependence on foreign supplies of products in key fields such as pharmaceuticals and digital technology. The initiative forms part of an updated industrial strategy aimed at strengthening the EU's single market, and was presented alongside a proposal for new regulations to tackle distortions caused by foreign subsidies in the bloc.
The European Commission's new industrial strategy is an update from one made in March 2020, before the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a pandemic. Coronavirus has wreaked havoc in the 27-member EU, making itaware that over-reliance on imports for key components such as those required in drug production and semiconductors could disrupt entire sectors.
"We are updating our industrial strategy, applying the knowledge we have accumulated during the pandemic, drawing on lessons learned and the available evidence," European Commission Executive Vice President Valdis Dombrovskis told a news conference on Wednesday. He said that three key factors have influenced the thinking on the new strategy. The pandemic has highlighted some fragilities in the single market when exposed to particular types of disruption. There has been a growing trend in many jurisdictions to analyze vulnerabilities in key strategic value chains. And the business case for the EU's green and digital transition has become even stronger, Dombrovskis said.
Europe depends on third countries, primarily China and India, in its pharmaceutical supply chains, according to a Commission staff working document.
WHO’s emergencies programme ‘can't deal with multiple crises’
The coronavirus pandemic has revealed that the World Health Organization’s health emergencies programme is “inadequately equipped to deal with a global pandemic while simultaneously responding to other emergencies”, with chronic under-funding and under-staffing leaving it overstretched in some areas, a new report has found.
The report, penned by the Independent Oversight and Advisory Committee for the WHO’s health emergencies programme, covers May 2020 to April 2021 and will be presented at the World Health Assembly later this month. The committee is chaired by Felicity Harvey, a visiting professor at Imperial College London’s Institute of Global Health Innovation.
The programme had to leverage the entire organization during the pandemic and strengthen partnerships with member countries and expert groups to overcome those challenges, the panel found.
The report made specific mention of the Access to COVID-19 Tools Accelerator, of which COVAX is part of, noting that it has “struggled with shortfalls of political will and global solidarity, limited production capacity of vaccines and insufficient financial investment.”
Digital Green Certificate
The EU’s so-called COVID passport – the Digital Green Certificate – to travel freely during the pandemic should be ready for use from the end of June, according to Justice Commissioner Didier Reynders. At the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) of the European Parliament on Tuesday (4 May), Reynders said that the certificate will be in use before the summer. “We want to ensure that all EU citizens receive the same treatment when member states lift restrictions on free movement for holders of vaccines, recovery or test certificates,” he said. Last month, the European Commission presented its proposal for the certificate, which will provide proof that a person has been vaccinated against COVID-19, has natural immunity from it, or has a recent negative test result.
On 26 March, the European Parliament launched an accelerated procedure to fast-track the certificate’s approval, and the Parliament and the Member States are currently negotiating the practical details. In principle, however, the individual member states decide which consequences are attached to the document. These could include, for example, free access to the territory without mandatory quarantine.
And that is all from EAPM for this week – stay safe, stay well, have an excellent weekend, and see you next week.
Iran3 days ago
Raisi versus Jansa - obscenity versus courage
China3 days ago
More Tibetan Buddhists behind bars in July
Israel4 days ago
Slovenian Prime Minister Jansa’s remarks on human rights violations in Iran draw reaction from EU’s Borrell
France4 days ago
European Commission appoints two new Heads of Representation in Paris and Luxembourg
Alcohol4 days ago
Top brewers toast easing of pandemic curbs with zero alcohol beer
Energy4 days ago
Joint statement of the US and Germany on support for Ukraine, European energy security and climate goals
European Commission4 days ago
EU disburses €250 million in Macro-Financial Assistance to Jordan
coronavirus3 days ago
EU begins real-time review of Sanofi-GSK COVID-19 vaccine